NY Gov. Hochul’s new gun law prohibits historical reenactor's muzzleloaders, flintlocks, black powder rifles

[JGalt]

Another fine example of the left erasing Constitutional rights and American history, one piece at a time.

"During the annual Battle of Plattsburgh commemoration, re-enactors from New York, Canada and the Northeast demonstrate the ground battles that occurred as a naval battle took place simultaneously on Lake Champlain. They also march in a parade with their muzzleloaders, flintlocks and black powder rifles and camp on the grounds of the local historic museum.

But there’s a problem this year. State Assemblyman D. Billy Jones, a Democrat representing the 115th district, says New York’s new gun law specifically prohibits all those activities. …

“The new law the way it’s written reenactors are not allowed to carry a firearm, a musket loading type rifle, black powder rifle, flintlock rifle, whatever because it’s in violation of the new law. The new gun law of New York state has claimed its first casualty: the Battle of Plattsburgh. It’s the first event happening after the new law went into effect on the 1st. There’s nothing in the law that let’s an exemption happen or a waiver happen for an event in a historical significance like we have here in Plattsburgh. We have over 70 reenactors that were coming to this event. Very disappointing.”

Battle of Plattsburgh reenactor chair PJ Miller says some reenactors have canceled their appearance at this weekend’s events."

NY Gov. Hochul's Law Claims Its First Victims: Historical Battle Reenactors - The Truth About Guns

 

[Darkwind]

Good. Now someone has the standing to bring it before the courts, right up to the SCOTUS.

The SCOTUS needs to rule that the States are NOT PERMITTED to limit gun rights in any manner. Full stop.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Good. Now someone has the standing to bring it before the courts, right up to the SCOTUS.

The SCOTUS needs to rule that the States are NOT PERMITTED to limit gun rights in any manner. Full stop.

Seriously? This is worthy of certiorari at the Supreme Court? Really?

I mean, yeah, it's probably a bit silly to ban the use of guns by reenactors, especially the kind of slow olde timey guns they have. This is a simple case of overreach by a small group of lawmakers.

If I were you I'd save the diapers and pissing your pants over something for a bigger battle. This isn't a hill worth dying on.

 

[Darkwind]

Seriously? This is worthy of certiorari at the Supreme Court? Really?

I mean, yeah, it's probably a bit silly to ban the use of guns by reenactors, especially the kind of slow olde timey guns they have. This is a simple case of overreach by a small group of lawmakers.

If I were you I'd save the diapers and pissing your pants over something for a bigger battle. This isn't a hill worth dying on.

It is Constitutionally criminal to ban any guns until and unless due process has been enacted. Due process takes rights from ONLY the guilty, never the lawful.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

It is Constitutionally criminal to ban any guns until and unless due process has been enacted. Due process takes rights from ONLY the guilty, never the lawful.

Boy you guys sure are quick to defend guns.

If only you cared about people as much.

 

[Darkwind]

Boy you guys sure are quick to defend guns.

If only you cared about people as much.

We do. Simply because we don't think your way is the right one does not equate to our not caring. That is and always has been a failed talking point tactic.

BTW, I am NOT defending guns. Guns are inanimate objects.

I am defending the 100's of millions of law-abiding citizens in the USA and their right (not given to them by the government) to defend themselves using the means of their choice.

 

[1srelluc]

Boy you guys sure are quick to defend guns.

If only you cared about people as much.

My guns aren't vapid entitled assholes.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know, there isn't a single link or mention of the actual gun law that was passed, or what it concerns exactly in the OP's link. Just a gun blog bitching about what they think is a new restriction on guns.

No, the guns carried in the reenactment wouldn't be prohibited or banned. The law specifically talks about realistic looking guns that are used in the commission of a crime.

Here is a link about the actual law.........................

Governor Hochul Signs Gun Safety Legislation Strengthening Bans on Realistic-looking Imitation Weapons Used to Commit Crimes

Governor Hochul signed legislation S.687/A.3998 to strengthen restrictions on imitation weapons, which can be used to commit crimes.

www.governor.ny.gov

Here is what they are saying, and it also specifically states that realistic guns (i.e. the muzzleloaders) CAN be used in theatrical productions (of which the reenactment is).

This new law strengthens existing restrictions on imitation weapons by clarifying that permissible imitation weapons must be easily identifiable: they cannot be black, blue, silver or aluminum, and must be colored white, bright red, bright orange, bright yellow, bright green, bright blue, bright pink, bright purple, or be made entirely of transparent or translucent materials. While certain imitation weapons are prohibited by certain municipalities, like New York City, this new law will create consistency throughout the state. Limited common-sense exceptions for special use, such as imitation weapons used in theatrical productions, are permitted.

They are saying that they want fake weapons to be readily identifiable as fake weapons to prevent them from being used in a crime or causing police to shoot the person with the fake weapon. Theatrical productions (for you guys that don't know what that means, it means telling a story via the process of acting, which is what the reenactment is) are exempt from this law.

But, criminals will do their best to get around this, probably by painting or modifying their weapons to look fake.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

We do. Simply because we don't think your way is the right one does not equate to our not caring. That is and always has been a failed talking point tactic.

Nope. Not buying it. ALmost 40 dead little kids and nothing done in the law to change anything meaningfully says your lobby is very effective at stopping all limits on guns but couldn't be less associated with saving lives.

BTW, I am NOT defending guns. Guns are inanimate objects.

Sure, sure.

I am defending the 100's of millions of law-abiding citizens in the USA and their right (not given to them by the government) to defend themselves using the means of their choice.

100's of Millions? You do realize that our population in the USA is only about 300 million. Yes we have lots of guns but they are not spread equally. A lot wind up in hands of gun fetishists and mass murderers.

Yes there are a lot of law-abiding citizens. But they can only buy 2 boxes of Sudafed a day but they can have as many guns each day as they want.

Our values are fucked up.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

My guns aren't vapid entitled assholes.

No, they're your good friends. Your only friends. Always there for you. You can go to your gun safe every day and lovingly touch and stroke their shiny metal surface. Feel the ridges. You get a little chubby and run off to fap one out.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

It is Constitutionally criminal to ban any guns until and unless due process has been enacted. Due process takes rights from ONLY the guilty, never the lawful.

You guys jump up and down and scream and stamp your feet at even the HINT that someone somewhere might want a gun not fired and you lose your shit.

20-40 little kids get their heads blown apart in a shooting and all you have are "thotz-n-prayerz".

Sorry, your values are skewed.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Boy you guys sure are quick to defend guns.

If only you cared about people as much.

We do. That's why we are quick to defend guns. They make quick work of people like this

Second suspect arrested over Saskatchewan stabbings DIES in police custody

According to the RCMP, Myles Sanderson, the second suspect in the Saskatchewan mass stabbing incident has died in police custody

euroweeklynews.com

 

[Darkwind]

Nope. Not buying it. ALmost 40 dead little kids and nothing done in the law to change anything meaningfully says your lobby is very effective at stopping all limits on guns but couldn't be less associated with saving lives.



Sure, sure.



100's of Millions? You do realize that our population in the USA is only about 300 million. Yes we have lots of guns but they are not spread equally. A lot wind up in hands of gun fetishists and mass murderers.

Yes there are a lot of law-abiding citizens. But they can only buy 2 boxes of Sudafed a day but they can have as many guns each day as they want.

Our values are fucked up.

It is estimated that over 200 million people own over 400 million guns.

More than that die each year in buckets and swimming pools. You're attempt at fear and guilt just failed massively. You see, there are already laws against using guns to kill kids. How did those laws work out? In addition, those kids were not killed by a law-abiding individual. So much failure on your part.

YOUR values are fucked up. Mine are in perfect alignment with a moral life.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I am defending the 100's of millions of law-abiding citizens in the USA and their right (not given to them by the government) to defend themselves using the means of their choice.

Not given to them by the government? I guess you don't know that the Constitution is the founding document for the government of the US, meaning that rights given in the Constitution are rights given by the government.

 

[Darkwind]

You guys jump up and down and scream and stamp your feet at even the HINT that someone somewhere might want a gun not fired and you lose your shit.

20-40 little kids get their heads blown apart in a shooting and all you have are "thotz-n-prayerz".

Sorry, your values are skewed.

No one here is losing their shit but you.

 

[Darkwind]

Not given to them by the government? I guess you don't know that the Constitution is the founding document for the government of the US, meaning that rights given in the Constitution are rights given by the government.

You realize that natural rights are not given to us by men. The Constitution is a LIMIT on government, not on the citizen.

 

[ABikerSailor]

We do. That's why we are quick to defend guns. They make quick work of people like this

Second suspect arrested over Saskatchewan stabbings DIES in police custody

According to the RCMP, Myles Sanderson, the second suspect in the Saskatchewan mass stabbing incident has died in police custody

euroweeklynews.com

Guns didn't "make quick work" of the person listed in your link. Nature and being in police custody, not being shot, "made quick work" of him.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

No one here is losing their shit but you.

LOL. Sure, sure.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You realize that natural rights are not given to us by men. The Constitution is a LIMIT on government, not on the citizen.

There is nothing "natural" about a gun, so how in the hell can it be considered a "natural" right? And yes, the Constitution is the founding document of our government, so rights given in it are rights given by the government. You conservatives like to twist around and mythologize the Constitution.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

It is estimated that over 200 million people own over 400 million guns.

Where do you get that figure?

More than that die each year in buckets and swimming pools. You're attempt at fear and guilt just failed massively.

Your arguments are so facile and moronic. You "win". Special prize!

YOUR values are fucked up. Mine are in perfect alignment with a moral life.

Sure, sure.

Now rub your weinie while reading about gun specs.